I am writing a mock client letter to advise a client about a property dispute regarding their dog after a divorce. Regarding standard of review, in my notes it says that "an erroneous exercise of discretion occurs if the circuit court makes an error in law, or fails to base its decision on facts of the record" so based on the facts toward the bottom of the quoted paragraph below, I was going to say the circuit court failed to apply the law correctly to the facts (because the facts show reasons why the dog wasn't a gift to one person, and could therefore be divisible-so another law would then be used) But I wasn't sure if I'm correct that based on the fact pattern, the issue is that the court made an error in law (or would it be the other part of what my notes say above, that it "failed to base its decision on facts of the record" I'm not sure) So feedback on it you think I am using the right standard of review overall (based on fact pattern and what my notes say) and if the paragraph I wrote below makes sense legally would be great. Thanks!

"On review, the appellate court will consider whether the circuit court properly applied its discretion. This standard of review will likely be against you. Nevertheless, we can argue that the circuit court did not apply the law correctly to the facts provided.The circuit court awarded Pemberly to Darcy because it decided the dog was a gift to Darcy from his sister Georgie. However, you also introduced a card from Darcy's sister at trial that read, in part, "A sweet beast for a sweet couple," and testified that Georgie introduces you as the "sister I always wanted." I believe you established sufficient countervailing evidence to show that Pemberly was, in fact, a gift to both of you. Pemberly would thus qualify as joint property subject to division under the Wisconsin Statue."